Compare StocksLVS vs V

Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) vs Visa Inc. (V): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, LVS is fairly valued at $49, with a DCF intrinsic value of $49 and a margin of safety of 1%. V is fairly valued at $327, with an intrinsic value of $304 and a margin of safety of -8%. Of the two, LVS has the wider margin of safety.

LVS
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
$48.72
VS
V
Visa Inc.
$327.24

Rewards

LVS
  • Gross margin of 80.1% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.
  • Share count has been reduced by 12% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
V
  • Visa Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 97.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Visa Inc. scores 99/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

LVS
  • FCF yield of 5.0% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • High leverage (7.74x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
  • 18 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
V
  • Insiders have sold $14.2M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
LVS
V
Valuation
$1.62B
Free Cash Flow
$20.84B
5.03%
FCF Yield
3.35%
17.98
Trailing P/E
28.48
13.26
Forward P/E
22.02
Quality & Moat
15.88%
ROIC
38.39%
90.45%
ROE
60.35%
80.09%
Gross Margin
97.78%
0.99
PEG Ratio
1.44
Balance Sheet Safety
7.74
Net Debt / Equity
0.28
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.58
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.33
2.26%
Dividend Yield
0.82%
LVS: 6Ties: 1V: 5
LVSV

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
LVS

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

V

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

$1 Retained Earnings Test

Learn more →
LVS
$2.81
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$2.57B
Δ Market Cap
+$7.20B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
V
$5.50
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$44.47B
Δ Market Cap
+$244.54B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

Learn more →
LVS
1.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 1.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $48.72
Fair Value: $49.35
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
V
7.6% Overvalued
Price is 7.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $327.24
Fair Value: $304.21
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
LVS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $49?

+9.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +12.1%

The market implies +9.8% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +12.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

V

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $327?

+13.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +13.4%

The market implies +13.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +13.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
LVS
38/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though roic consistency shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
V
99/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
LVS
-2.17
Possible Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
V
-2.50
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Ownership Breakdown

Learn more →
LVS
Insiders 58.5%Institutions 42.2%
No. of Institutional Holders1,081
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
V
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 91.7%Retail & Other 8.2%
No. of Institutional Holders5,860
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
LVS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
PANT MUKTESH
Director
$1.00M
@ $43.51 · 2025-03-14
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
V
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
LVS
1
Sells (3M)
18
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $333.60M
FORMAN CHARLES D
Director
$616,626
@ $54.09 · 2026-04-27
DUMONT PATRICK
Chief Executive Officer
$3.29M
@ $54.75 · 2026-03-17
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$83.39M
@ $66.71 · 2025-12-17
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$50.09M
@ $66.79 · 2025-12-15
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$26.57M
@ $66.42 · 2025-12-11
DUMONT PATRICK
President
$9.22M
@ $67.96 · 2025-12-03
DUMONT PATRICK
President
$15.91M
@ $69.88 · 2025-12-02
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$7.02M
@ $70.17 · 2025-12-01
CHAFETZ IRWIN
Director
$2.09M
@ $69.76 · 2025-12-01
HUDSON D. ZACHARY
Officer
$3.75M
@ $70.37 · 2025-12-01
HYZAK RANDY A.
Chief Financial Officer
$3.82M
@ $66.45 · 2025-11-25
HUDSON D. ZACHARY
Officer
$6.50M
@ $64.99 · 2025-11-07
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$25.22M
@ $63.04 · 2025-11-06
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$23.68M
@ $59.20 · 2025-10-31
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$53.02M
@ $58.92 · 2025-10-30
GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
Chief Executive Officer
$17.80M
@ $59.32 · 2025-10-27
FORMAN CHARLES D
Director
$1.08M
@ $54.13 · 2025-09-10
FORMAN CHARLES D
Director
$526,300
@ $52.63 · 2025-08-06
HUDSON D. ZACHARY
Officer
$1.33M
@ $51.40 · 2024-11-27
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
V
2
Sells (3M)
17
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $53.88M
SUH CHRIS
Chief Financial Officer
$3.46M
@ $324.81 · 2026-05-12
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$10.70M
@ $340.14 · 2026-04-29
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$201,253
@ $309.62 · 2026-03-11
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.66M
@ $349.18 · 2026-01-02
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.57M
@ $340.07 · 2025-12-11
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$699,315
@ $345.00 · 2025-12-11
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$7.84M
@ $330.14 · 2025-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$2.50M
@ $331.45 · 2025-12-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$2.08M
@ $330.00 · 2025-11-21
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$707,917
@ $325.93 · 2025-11-21
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$302,832
@ $336.48 · 2025-11-04
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.58M
@ $341.00 · 2025-11-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.59M
@ $342.30 · 2025-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.65M
@ $348.57 · 2025-09-02
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$697,329
@ $344.02 · 2025-08-18
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.60M
@ $343.13 · 2025-08-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.05M
@ $353.82 · 2025-07-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$4.36M
@ $375.00 · 2025-06-11
TANEJA RAJAT
President
$18.44M
@ $368.87 · 2025-06-05
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$17.10M
@ $370.00 · 2025-06-05
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $362.77 · 2025-06-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$6.32M
@ $357.45 · 2025-05-12
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$5.26M
@ $355.04 · 2025-05-08
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.98M
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$889,868
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.02M
@ $350.44 · 2025-04-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$13.40M
@ $340.41 · 2025-03-19
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$12.88M
@ $327.20 · 2025-03-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $363.00 · 2025-03-03
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$11.80M
@ $349.77 · 2025-02-07
ANDRESKI PETER M
Officer
$815,314
@ $349.62 · 2025-02-07
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.93M
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$874,480
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.74M
@ $317.78 · 2025-01-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$11.15M
@ $315.55 · 2024-12-13
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.73M
@ $316.90 · 2024-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$668,603
@ $307.97 · 2024-11-22
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.49M
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$741,996
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.39M
@ $276.97 · 2024-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.38M
@ $276.37 · 2024-09-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.37M
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$707,300
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$10.12M
@ $267.64 · 2024-08-16
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
LVS
FearGreed
😨Fear(34/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
V
FearGreed
😐Neutral(57/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

⚖️ Buffett Signal

Learn more →
LVS
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Fear (34)
V
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (57)
View LVS Full AnalysisView V Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: LVS vs V

Is Las Vegas Sands Corp. or Visa Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LVS trades at a 1.3% margin of safety (intrinsic value $49 vs. price $49), compared to V's -7.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $304 vs. $327).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Las Vegas Sands Corp. or Visa Inc.?

V scores 99/100 (Wide moat), while LVS scores 38/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Las Vegas Sands Corp. in financial distress?

LVS's Altman Z-Score of 2.7 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. V scores 8.1 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which company has better free cash flow, Las Vegas Sands Corp. or Visa Inc.?

Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) generates a 5.0% free cash flow yield, compared to Visa Inc.'s 3.3%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Las Vegas Sands Corp. or Visa Inc.?

V earns 38.4% ROIC versus LVS's 15.9%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, Las Vegas Sands Corp.'s or Visa Inc.'s?

V's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to LVS's 81/100 (Very Safe). V has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.